How Safe Is Cycling?

theodp writes "With new bike sharing programs all the rage, spending tens of millions of dollars to make city streets more bike friendly with hundreds of miles of bike lanes has become a priority for bike-loving mayors like NYC's Michael Bloomberg and Chicago's Rahm Emanuel. 'You cannot be for a startup, high-tech economy and not be pro-bike,' claimed Emanuel, who credited bike-sharing and bike lanes for attracting Google and Motorola Mobility to downtown Chicago. Now, with huge bike-sharing contracts awarded and programs underway, the NY Times asks the big question, How Safe Is Cycling? Because bike accidents rarely make front page news and are likely to be dramatically underreported, it's hard to say, concludes the NYT's Gina Kolata. UCSF trauma surgeon Dr. Rochelle Dicker, who studied hospital and police records for 2,504 bicyclists treated at San Francisco General Hospital, told Kolata,'Lots of my colleagues do not want to ride after seeing these [city biking] injuries.' On the other hand, Andy Pruitt, the founder of the Boulder Center for Sports Medicine and an avid lifelong cyclist, said the dangers were overstated, noting he's only broken his collarbone twice and hip once in four decades of long-distance cycling. So, is cycling safe, especially in the city? And is it OK to follow Mayor Emanuel's lead and lose the helmet?"

Comments

How safe?

[nospam007]

Google is your friend, it can show you every last killed and injured biker.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/Bicycles
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811743.pdf

OTOH there are 89 car related deaths each and every day in the US, those too do not make the front page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

Re:How safe?

[funwithBSD]

http://www.amazon.com/Effective-Cycling-John-Forester/dp/0262516942

Has definitive answers to how and why Cyclists get hurt.

I have an older version, but effectively the injury/death rate is mostly effected by poor decisions by the cyclist, not the car. Getting hit from behind by a car was 2% of injuries (but a major cause of death) while getting hit by the asshole riding against traffic was 33%.

In fact, the most dangerous thing to a cyclist is another cyclist.

Re:How safe?

[Beardo the Bearded]

Okay, when I did an analysis of US stats last year, I found that cyclists are:

1% of traffic
2% of traffic injuries and fatalities

You're more likely to get seriously hurt when you get into an accident on a bike. That's just obvious, since you're cruising around in nothing but skintanium. There's no way -- none -- that a bike is going to come out ahead in a collision with a motorized vehicle. A fight with someone that's got 20 pounds on you is one-sided, so imagine a fight against someone that's got 2 tons on you and is made out of steel. This is why, when I bike, I assume that I never ever, under any circumstances ever, ever think that I have the right of way. A bike never has the right of way. I say this because of the laws of physics -- if a delivery van blows a stop sign and t-bones you, he can hose down his van and get back to work tomorrow. If you're really, really lucky and you have good medical care, you might be able to pee on your own in a couple of months. So whose fault is it? Who cares? As the cyclist, you're always "all in" when you're biking, so you always assume that every accident is your fault.

I started biking to school 17 years and 90 pounds ago. I bike to work 4/5 days a week unless it's snowing. (I don't bike when it's snowing; it's too dangerous with the cars out there, and on Thursdays I jog in.) In all that time, I've been hit one time. A woman on a road bike that was drafting behind me. A car was approaching the intersection (they have a stop) but they were approaching a little too fast for my liking. I hit my brakes, and they're tuned to stop my bike from full speed to stopped in about 2 meters. She couldn't stop nearly that well, and she rear-ended me. She tacoed her wheel and broke one of my rear lights. A lot of close calls, drivers that don't pay attention, but I pay enough attention for both of us.

Ironically, I do have a spinal injury, but I was hours away from the closest car when I got it.

Re:How safe?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm cool with bicycles except in the mornings when everyone is trying to get to work....you're passing someone, and BANG, you have to hit the brakes when you see a damned bike in the road with heavy traffic slowing shit down, when you're trying to make it to work.

I've likely almost killed a few idiots that I almost didn't see, especially in areas where the sun glare hits you in the early morning or late afternoon.

I know bikes "technically" have the same right to be on the road as cars, but let's be realistic in this day in age....there are times when it is NOT safe to be on a bike on a public road without a specific bike lane that is out of the main traffic lanes.

I like to ride a bike for exercise, but I'd damned sure not be out on the road during rush out without a being on a motorized vehicle.

You mean it's not safe to be on the road with YOU.

Waaah waaah waaaah. YOU need to get to work, so the cyclist is supposed to get out of YOUR way?

Seems like YOU are the problem.

Re:How safe?

[ronmon]

Listen to this and believe it. I have lived in Key West since 1990 and sold my last fuel burner in 1995. I have a "grocery getter" bike with big baskets and a lean and fast bike for getting somewhere quickly or running my dog. I stop at traffic lights and stop signs, obey one way streets and respect car traffic while not expecting the same in return. However, I am in the minority and am fully aware of that.

Most bicyclists do not think that road rules apply to them whether they are tourists or locals. Looking both ways when crossing a one way street has saved me from many accidents. Drivers don't see you, especially when they are talking on their phones. Bike lanes are not respected. It is up to you as a cyclist to anticipate the other guy doing something stupid and unexpected. They surely will.

Having driven motorcycles for many years prior to moving here I already had this mind set and it helped a great deal.

Re:How safe?

[hawguy]

I'm cool with bicycles except in the mornings when everyone is trying to get to work....you're passing someone, and BANG, you have to hit the brakes when you see a damned bike in the road with heavy traffic slowing shit down, when you're trying to make it to work.

What a coincidence, I'm cool with cars except when I'm trying to bike to work. I'm biking along a road, staying as far to the right as I safely can (avoiding broken road edges, parked car doors, etc), and suddenly *BANG*, I've got a car driving 2 feet behind me. Cars have their place and all, but I'm just trying to get to work, can't the car drivers leave earlier or later in the day?

I've likely almost killed a few idiots that I almost didn't see, especially in areas where the sun glare hits you in the early morning or late afternoon.

Perhaps you're driving too fast for conditions if you've "almost killed a few". Speed limits are *maximums", driving below the speed limit when conditions warrant it is always legal. Another option would be to pull off the road and wait until conditions improve to the point where you can see safely - a good rule of thumb is that if you can't see a human shaped object on the road, then you can't see well enough to drive.

I know bikes "technically" have the same right to be on the road as cars, but let's be realistic in this day in age....there are times when it is NOT safe to be on a bike on a public road without a specific bike lane that is out of the main traffic lanes.

You can take "technically" out of that sentence - bikes have the same right to the roads as cars do (except in certain specific situations). Trust me, cyclists would like more bike lanes too, but car drivers whine about loss of lanes and/or parking everytime one is contemplated.

I like to ride a bike for exercise, but I'd damned sure not be out on the road during rush out without a being on a motorized vehicle.

Bikes aren't just for exercise - try commuting on one.

Re:How safe?

[hawguy]

I'm driving at a speed that is safe for the automobile traffic around me....most of us are.

That appears to be a problem with your driving. You don't drive at a speed that's safe for the automobile traffic around you, you drive at a speed that's safe for the road you're on, and apparently you're on a road that's frequented by cyclists. If you were on a limited access highway, maybe you could get away with your style of driving, but anywhere else you need to drive at a safe and prudent speed and expect obstacles in the road - bikes, pedestrians, stalled cars, dogs, cows, etc. I once narrowly avoided a refrigerator that was left in the middle of the road after it fell off a truck.

We aren't expecting to have to slow quickly or stop for a slow moving, non-motorized vehicle suddenly appearing in the middle of the road.

I wouldn't lump all drivers in with yourself, not all drivers have such little control of their vehicle they fear running over cyclists.

Face it...the roads are built and meant for motorized vehicles. It is the smaller bicycles that have to be on the lookout and use judgement on when it is save to ride and on what roads.

Actually, many roads were first built because of lobbying by cyclists -- it wasn't until cars came later that bikes were pushed off to the shoulders.

You can go on and on all you want on laws and insurance, etc....but what good is that going to do for you when racked up in the hospital for months, and that's even if you survive a duel with a 3000+ lbs metal vehicle going about 3-4x as fast as you are?

Oh, I understand my mortality when I'm on my bike, and since I know i'm not going to change the laws of physics, I've continued to encourage my legislators to write laws that hold cars more responsible when they are at-fault in collisions with cyclists. If car drivers thought they might face jail time for side swiping a cyclist, or hitting a cyclist "because I didn't see him" or "I was going too fast to stop", then perhaps they'll drive a little more carefully.

Hopefully it's just a temporary problem and self-driving cars will make car-bike collisions much less common.

Re:How safe?

[hawguy]

You can take "technically" out of that sentence - bikes have the same right to the roads as cars do (except in certain specific situations).

Whenever I see a bicyclist say those words, he almost never follows them with "and the same responsibilities to obey the law". It's always in the context that bicyclists want to be treated by drivers as the law says they must, but them following the vehicular laws isn't important.

If you're in the SF bay area, let me know, I'll meet you for a weekend ride and show you that there are cyclists that *do* follow laws as much as they expect cars to respect them.

You say "*BANG*, I've got a car driving 2 feet behind me" during a commute to work on city streets. So? There's a car two feet behind that car, and another one two feet behind him. It's called "rush hour", or in some smaller town, "rush minute". Part of commuting and quite legal.

If you've got cars stacked up 2 feet from each other, then you're in stop and go traffic that's moving at a crawl - bikes aren't slowing you down, they are reducing the number of cars in front of you.

You in particular may be very fastidious in obeying traffic signals and rules of the road, but since almost none of the riders I come across in this town bother with such trivialities it is impossible not to paint the entire riding population with the same brush.

Yes, some cyclists obey the law, some don't. Some car drivers obey the law, some don't. Yet we all have to share the same roads.

In fact, to keep from killing many of your compatriots, it is necessary to assume they are going to ignore the law. A bike approaching the street you are on from a side street with a stop sign? Assume he isn't going to, assume he's going to actually speed up to challenge you for the right of way, and then he's going to either lay over in a sharp turn or side-step into the crosswalk to try to invoke the pedestrian in a crosswalk laws on you.

That's one of my biggest pet peeves - I can maintain a stopped trackstand for only a few seconds before i've got to unclip and put my feet down - when a car has the right of way at a stop sign, I wish they would just take it because then I can get through the intersection faster. Encouraging cyclists to take the right of way when they don't have right of way just further encourages them to not respect right of way laws.

only?

[themushroom]

he's only broken his collarbone twice and hip once

Only? That sounds like proof of concept rather than a proof of overstatement.

Re:only?

[frinkster]

he's only broken his collarbone twice and hip once

Only? That sounds like proof of concept rather than a proof of overstatement.

If you were to see the actual quote, you may feel differently:

Dr. Pruitt cites his own example. Now 62, he was a bicycle racer and has been riding for the past four decades. He covers 5,000 to 10,000 miles a year.

In all that time, he has had four serious crashes. He broke his collarbone twice while racing and had two crashes on a mountain bike, breaking a hip one time and spraining a wrist the other.

This is a worthless data point.

Re:only?

[rolfwind]

As an avid rider, I think the most dangerous part of biking are all those people that follow rules for pedestrians when it suits them and rules for road traffic when it suits them. As a driver, I'm 5x more cautious with a biker around than a pedestrian, because they are so unpredictable and impatient.

The best way to make cycling safer

[FreeUser]

The best way to make cycling in major cities safer would be to

1) require a drivers license to cycle on city streets
2) require cyclists to obey all traffic laws (this is already true in many jurisdictions)
3) disallow cyclists (and motorcycles) from weaving between lanes to move ahead in traffic. Require them to use lanes in the same manner as other vehicles (you don't see 2 smart cars trying to share one lane of traffic)
4) enforce #1, #2 and #3 as aggressivley with cyclists as with automobiles, with the same penalties

I have seen more pedestrians run down (or nearly run down) by cyclists running red lights, weaving in and out of slow moving traffic, transitioning from using the streets to using pedestrian crosswalks to thwart lights or make lefts from a right hand lane across traffic. I cannot count the number of times I've seen aggressive cyclists in New York and Chicago weave through cars, use the wrong side of the road (!!!), etc. and then get upset when someone nearly knocks them over because they weren't seen being where they didn't belong.

If you require a level of competence (driver's license), require all vehicles using the roads to abide by the same laws (and enforce equally, with equal consequences), you'd go a long way toward improving cycling safety.

Re:An important distinction

[pmontra]

Given the speed and travelled distance difference between cars and bicycles maybe per-hour accidents would be a better metric.

Thumbs up for separating bikes from everything else, cars and pedestrians. Bike lanes on sidewalks in city centers are slow and dangerous because of pedestrians. I always prefer to share the road with cars: they're more predictable and I get home sooner.